Aileron

The reason why you can do illegal stuff on the internet is because most lawyers can't use a computer. The minute they figure it out, its all over!

...or you could have your so-called "experienced players" turn on X every once and a while. I like to use quick pulses just to see if any cloakers are creeping up.

Some of you talk about using reps with mines as if it is a new idea. I have a few additions. Try adding a portal into your rep/mine trap. If you can predict where your enemy will be you can port in on them to attack by suprise. Also, the repping people into mines routine can me modified. You can replace the mines with a burst or area with a lot of shooting going on. Here is the good one though - you can use mines to detect cloaked ships in your base. Put a mine inside each of the 2x2 passes in the north and south wings of the powerball bases. If the mines suddenly detonate or dissappear, you got a cloaker. This generally won't work for Weasels however, because it is always possible (not always successfully done) to squeeze by the mines in a 1x1 ship. Unless ofcourse, the mines have prox.

First off I'll point out that I don't even like anime, why I have this avatar is anybody's guess and I am too lazy to change it. That said, I'll see if I can answer the question "Who is Aileron?". Aileron is essentially the one-man Subspace equivolent of a plague of locusts. Aileron will travel from zone to zone bringing havok and mayham to their inhabitants, before quickly moving on to spread the pain elseware. He is truly beyond 1337. Instead of mastering a specific ship's strategy or even a zone's strategy, Aileron has mastered general skillz which apply to all zones. Thus, when Aileron plays he does not play under what the inhabitants are used to facing. Instead, he will strike with the weapons often overlooked. He uses specials to devastating effect, and is practically invincible until he has consumed at least half of them. He possesses phenomenal dodging ability, which when coupled with lag and a love for 1 tile wide ships makes him a hard target. Why Aileron has come to 17th Parallel? The motives for Aileron's near-continuous zone-jumping will remain secret, for Aileron fears that once sysops can track his movements they will prevent him from coming to their zones. Aileron has only been playing in 17th for a few weeks, and has already consistantly laid the smack-down on several local veterans. One would be well advised not to piss this player off, because his wrath is something thankfully never seen by most of the Subspace Community. -Needless to say, I have a lot of time to waste at the moment. Now back to the topic. As for the 1 tile wide weasel, get used to one tile wide ships. Ever since the ship size has been able to be changed, most zones have designated one ship as 1 tile wide. To fight a one tile wide ship requires a slight change in strategy. Use weapons that allow greater inaccuracy. Turn on multifire. Scatter your bullets in wide clouds instead of steady streams. And above all, do not even bother to fire a non-prox bomb unless you plan on wallbombing them. In most of these cases, it means sacrificing a little damage done to the opponant in the end. However, most 1 tile wide ships can't take much damage anyway. As for there being 3 cloak ships, you only need 1. Since it would suck to take ALL of the cloakers out of the zone, and it doesn't really matter if there are 1, 3, or even 6 cloaking ship types, then there really is no problem. If you really have that much of a problem with cloakers, change to a Warbird, but fly with the X off most of the time. That way, you maintain about 95% of the fighting capability, can deal with those pesky cloakers, and even get a few specials out of it.

Did you even read my post? To answer your question, yes. In war people suffer, whether you are using nukes or snowballs. Invariably, some of them are innocent. In a just war, the cause has to be so lofty to include the suffering of innocents. Its a logical contradiction to say that a war was justified but the suffering of innocents not. My theory doesn't include weapons being used in unjust war, but in that event I figure we would have worse moral problems. I think I could beat Madhaha's point, but I think I speak for all of us by saying I would rather see the UD debate die than revive it. Back to the current discussion, Madhaha's pretty much right in this case. Although it is a lot more subtle and less controlled than his wording implies. Overall, you cannot blame Iraqis for having an Iraqi opinion. Their views mostly came from the society they live in. Propeganda is a part of it, but not all of it. That is also in my opinion what the war on terror is really about. The society they have generates their opinions, and their opinions generate terrorism. To destroy terrorism, we have to remove the those opinions and thus their society. The War on Terrorism is really going to have to be a long war against virtually the entire Middle Eastern society. To justify it, we would have to prove their society is in and of itself wrong. First, note that it is possible for one society to be right and another wrong because the ethical theory of normative cultural relativism cannot be proven logically. As for our justification, we have several angles. The first is that they are clearly violent. The peace generated by their removal can justify action. The second is that they are oppresive to their own people. Third, they have stronger defined social classes than necessary. Those two can justify the evils of the society itself. However, that whole paragraph is unneeded. We have endured several terrorists acts, which qualify as acts of war. The War on Terror is a defensive war - the ultimate cause is that we don't get attacked again. Defensive wars really do not have to be justified.

You misinterpreted my arguement. The meaning of Marx's claim was that the rich don't have to do hard work to remain rich. This is true, but that was not my point. My point was that currently, it is more profitable to invest in ideas than goods or services. You can make more money by buying stocks than by building a factory and producing something. The thing is that a company that does this is effectively removing themselves from capitalist theory. Basically, I'm saying that capitalism is good in theory and bad in practice, and government intervention should exist just enough to maintain the ideal state. Also recognize that money is an idea. Unlike real objects, money can be created and destoyed. It is possible for two people to interact and both to profit. Capitalism is not a system of winners and losers. It is a system of mutual benefit. If both parties do not benefit, then it isn't capitalism. The point is just because one guy is rich doesn't mean tha somebody else lost money. The chief criticism of capitalism is the presence of losers. When two things compete, invariably one must lose. However, there are two things that redeem capitalism. The first is that it is not the goal to defeat the compe!@#$%^&*ion, but to make money yourself. If he made 5 mil and you made 2 mil, you still won because how much he made should be irrelevent to you. However, sometimes, particularly in employment situations, a loser is required for another to gain. That is merely life. Sometimes people lose. The only thing we can do is limit the number of losers and limit how much they lose. That is my reasoning behind point 2. The more people that are hired, the less losers there are. However, overall this whole debate is completely and utterly irrelevent. Capitalism is forced upon us by our current level of technology and our environment. If we switched to any other system, it would invariably collapse back into capitalism. That is what communism did. When they tried to impliment it, they screwed up. Instead of public ownership, it became government ownership. Instead of classless society, it became the opposite. Basically, when they tried to impliment it, all they really did was make the government one big corporation. To look at what it would take to remove capitalsim, lets look at the last system of fuedalism. When was fuedalism destroyed? Was it when humanity decided it was immoral for a local barony to rule a serf's life? Was it when serfdom was destroyed? It was not. When most countries freed their serfs, most of them merely started working freely under practically the same cir-*BAD WORD*-stances. Instead of being bound to the land by legal forces, they were bound by economic forces. Fuedalism was destroyed by the second cultural and industrial revolutions. It was only until a farmer could make more money by leaving the farm and moving to the city did fuedalism get truly destroyed. The same thing happened to the hunter-gatherer societies. They did not end until the first agricultural revolution. Thus, no matter how much we want to, capitalism cannot be removed by any means. In order to remove it, we will need a second industrial revolution as well as something else. Capitalism will remain in place until our level of technology makes it obsolete.

As an outsider, I am probably the only one here with an impartial opinion. The terrier should be changed. Its speed and rotation promote a high speed bombing strategy, whereas the most of its raw firepower lies in their guns. Overall, it would be good the bombs strengthened and the guns weakened. Slightly mind you. Changing the levels would probably be too much. Maybe the gun fire rate should be reduced, and a little shrapnel be added to the bombs.

I thought it was hilarious. You 17th parallel peeps just don't understand. In other zones, there can easily be four or five players using kill macros and repeating them two or three times per kill. When this happens its almost impossible to hold on a conversation. That is why they made my list.

Well, the thing about capitalism is that as long as the system is free market, the only way a person can make money for themselves is by providing some kind of service for the community. Yes, people are often greedy and selfish, but capitalism is a method of turning those negative energies into positive output for the community as a whole. ...that is ofcourse, !@#$%^&*uming the system is free market The problem is that it is rarely free market. When we are talking small local establishments, capitalism works fine. However, when we get into large multinational corporations, it changes. As corporations gain size, they gain power over their industry. As they gain power, they eventually am!@#$%^&* enough to take the free market out of the system. Overall, government intervention should only be applied to keep the system a free market one. However, this debate was closed in the 1920's. Lets move on. The problem today is that companies are focusing their capital on investment of capital rather than production of a hardcore good or service. Enron, just before their collapse, owned no physical electrical equipment. They made most of their money by buying and selling time on other companies' equipment. They produced nothing. They provided nothing. They did nothing at all in the real world. This is hardly the result of any inherint flaw in capitalism. Under the theorhetical base capitalism, if one produces nothing, one gains nothing. Thus, the source must exist in a problem in the legal system. In my opinion, we could change many of the problems with capitalism by doing the following. 1) Stop considering corporations as persons by legal standards. They are not people, they are organizations with people making the decisions. Under the current system, the decision makers are not accountable for their mistakes - the corporation is. A CEO could make horrible and immoral decisions, but it is his company who pays the price. We could administer justice a lot better if we could attack the people instead of the organizations. 2) Give tax breaks for desireable behaviors. Want a corporation to produce hard product instead of investing? Give them a break for every item they produce. Want a corporation to hire more employees? Give them a tax break for every dollor they spend on an employee. Want a corporation to stay domestic? Tax break (and tariffs). Want a corporation to not produce as much pollution? You get the idea. 3) Stop going after the big guys and start going after the bad guys. Face it, Microsoft is a huge corporation, but all in all it is pretty clean as far as corporations go. Its more domestic then foreign, and makes most of its money making a quality hardcore product. (If you think Windows isn't a quality product, try teaching your grandparents how to use Linux.) The point is while Microsoft was put to trial for very loose violations of anti-trust laws, Enron was breaking virtually every law in the book. We need to start paying attention to what companies do, not how big they are. Microsoft was huge, but wasn't hurting anybody. Enron was smaller, but screwed a lot of shareholders and employees. We need to stop worrying about the elephants and pay more attention to the lions.

*sees epox walk in* *thinks to himself - "alliance soldier! Oh, its only one Air Force guy, not the usual tactical assault team I am used to. The benefits of being officially dead. Still, I better get outta here before he notices."* *uses personal portal to warp into ship* *flies 5 tile wide NightWasp to secret meeting location* *has 10 genetically engineered golem monsters set up a defensive parimeter* *waits for Greased to show up*

First off, please use periods. Secondly, it is infact a problem with the US is that we work too hard. Our problems with unemployment are a result of this. An American company will usually remove one employee and expect another to do the work of two. What we need to do is lower the standards for employed people so that the unemployed can pick up the slack.

*whispers to Greased in such a way that no one else can hear. If you aren't Greased, don't bother reading. Its long and boring anyways.* "Well, good. I need a really good, but more importantly a brave and stealthy one." "You see, I have a bit of a problem. In order to fund some home improvements, I need to sell some "pharmecuticals" to some clients on the Ithkul colony of Sentile Major. Unfortunately, my ship does nothing but draw attention and my pharmecuticals are rather - unlicensed. I need you to take the shipment and deliver it to my clients. Obviously, you must avoid Ithkul Imperial Cruisers. Not only that, but the Alliance is also trying to stop my line of trade. The tricky part is that you can't destoy any of the latter's ships should they engage you. I really do not want to get them angry at my organization. My shipments will be sealed in several large dueterium fuel cells with dueterium inside mind you. There is also a detonating device inside each. Should any be opened prematurely, they will detonate the hydrogen and likely destroy your vessel. They will also detonate should any Alliance ship be destroyed nearby. I apologize for this, but I do need to have security measures. I will give you this holo-map to where my clients will be located from galazy wide to specific room. They will be the only humans around, so you will have no problem recognizing them. All you need to do is push the button and give voice commands. Carefull, it is tuned in to Alliance and Ithkul frequencies. If a large presense is or was nearby, say a ship, this thing becomes a five-second fuse plasma grenade. Its another one of my security devices. To turn it back into a map, you must put it in an area of outside temperature -20 degrees Centegrade. Total payment for your services is $3 million. You will get one from me as you pick up your shipments and two from my clients as yolu drop them off. Your map shows the time and place for the pickup. Do you accept my offer?"

They are weapons Madhaha; health concerns should be one of the last things in mind for the design of them. The point is that the nuclear component is a side effect. It would be nicer for us if they were not radioactive at all. It really isn't part of the desired weapon. In a real nuke, the radioactive component is a integral and necessary part of the design. In U-238 s-*BAD WORD*-s it is merely a side effect. However, it still exists. The "conspiracy" can be explained though. First, one factors in that these things' ideal target is vehicles. Then, of the minority that don't hit vehicles, most will either kill their victims; an American artillary or tank round will do a lot to an unprotected infantryman. Of the ones that wound their victims, most will either go straight through them or be easily removed. Then factor in the fact that this is pretty low-level material. Overall, the potential number of people to be effected by these grows slim. When one weighs the amount of casualties averted by superior weaponry vs. the number of unprotected persons getting injured by tank rounds in the particular fashion required, one can see that it could very well be likely that these weapons avert more pain than they cause. That however is beside the point. What we are talking about is weapons here. Weapons are designed to hurt and kill people. These are tools of war, which also cause pain and death. We cannot remove these factors from either case. Wars have to be justified to be moral. If the proper justification exists, then the pain and death caused by the war are outweighed by the cause. The cause has to be indeed lofty, because it has to justify the pain and death of many people, some of them innocent. If the cause is indeed important enough to justify that, it is immoral to minimize pain and death at expense of the cause, because the cause is of the greater importance. Thus, we should design of weapons, training, and tactics to further the cause first and minimize pain second. The U-238 s-*BAD WORD*-s are a good example of this. The pain cause by them was put into consideration, but not enough to overrule the effectiveness of the weapon to advance the cause of the war. As for any conspiracy involving these weapons, there definitely is none. Given the history of conspiracies and common sense, when somebody does try to cover up something, they do not mention it at all. If there was any major problem with these s-*BAD WORD*-s, their very existence would be classified. Take for example the infamous Area-51. They don't claim that the base exists and they don't do anything unusual there, they claim that the base does not exist. If U-238 s-*BAD WORD*-s caused problems, it would be much safer to disavow their existence or use. As for the question of whether or not nukes will be used, get a crystal ball. They may be, they may be not, its really pure conjecture. The only point I will make is that they are generally a tool for the desperate. To that end, the more a country has to lose, the less likely that they want to use them. The US frankly is the last country in line to have the desire to drop a nuke. The first person in line would be some suicidal fanatic.

(OOC-Alright fine, I guess I can't post long posts. The jist of my last one is that I ressurected Ricebowl as a Eununch with a mindcontrol chip and DNA that will decompose into beer yeast if I push a button. I then ordered him to save the galaxy and gave him a pistol, some charges, a map, some reefer, and a disguise device. As for me role-playing his character - technically, yes, in any manner in which we should care, no.) *Changes mind - Ricebowl? Save the galaxy? How high was I? - turns off Ricebowl's mind control chip - saves galaxy on his own - loots Ithkul treasury on way out* *buys 5 tile wide NightWasp with L4 guns, bombs, 99999 nrg with 99999 recharge, and X-radar that byp!@#$%^&*es the stealth and cloak that byp!@#$%^&*es X-radar - call it Y-Radar.* *flies into parking lot* "What? All the spaces are only 2 tiles wide! ARGH!!" *parks very distant safety zone - leaves shields on and leaves a genetic golem in the ship to protect it from thieves. Also leaves a personal portal so I can warp into it at will.* *creates chaos gate - walks into bar. A personal shielding device is up, and I am escorted by two large mindless genetic monsters.* "I could use a pilot."

Gosh, radiation is probably the most overestimated health hazard. It is either Alpha and Beta particles that cannot penetrate paper or Gamma particles that cannot carry that much energy. It takes a LOT of radiation to do permanent damage to somebody. Radiation is pretty much a boogieman that everybody fears, but doesn't really hurt anybody. Depleted Uranium is safe, atleast its safe enough to put in a device intended to kill people. Before they are put into weapons, every sample is put to a radiation tester to see if they put off harmfull amounts of radiation. As for your doubt as to weather "safe" levels are acceptable, may I remind you who exactly makes these standards. First off, they are extremely intelligent and well educated. Most likely, they have forgotten more about medicine and physics than you and I will likely ever know. Not only that, but also took whatever value they got and divided it by a safety factor, and considering public outcry, that value is high. In layman's terms, the announced "safe" level is probably 100 times less than the real safe level. Also, they have invested interest in making the annouced safe level the actual safe level. If somebody gets hurt after recieving a "safe" dosage of radiation, those who made the levels gets @$$|=U(|<3|) by lawyers. If they want to keep their careers, the NRC scientists have to announce a truly safe level. Yes, some nuclear facilities might put pressure on them to lower the standards, but environmental groups put pressure to raise them. All in all, it is in their best interest to set the announce safe level at a level which is indeed safe. So stop putting quotation marks around 'safe'. Those levels are proclaimed as safe for a reason by people who would only like to make the standard higher than necessary. Thus, the real question is whether or not the s-*BAD WORD*-s comply with NRC regulations. On one hand, the companies who make them probably make more profits off of lower standard products. One the other hand, NRC inspectors are there to prevent that from happening. Overall, there is a huge difference between a depleted uranium s-*BAD WORD*- and a nuclear weapon. The former is a device that can theorhetically exist without a nuclear component, the latter it is necessary. They are not even close to the same, so don't act like they are. If somebody was shooting a depleted uranium s-*BAD WORD*- at me, I would be more worried about the thing blowing me to pieces rather than the very slight chances that the tiny fragments of uranium could possibly be radioactive.

Well, its very simple, coming up with a criticism for something is way easier than coming up with your own opinion. Basically, this is a result of stupid people trying to sound intelligent.

~sigh~ Okay, so you won't believe the media because its biased, but you will fall head over heals for every conspiracy theory somebody comes up with? Look, dates on a tree is hardly good proof that he was captured earlier, there could have been differences in the weather, the tree itself, the ground, etc. Besides, how do you positively know that the dates are ripe, the picture cannot be perfect, and a slight difference in tint could account for this. They could appear ripe and infact not be. The fact that he was dirty proves very little - when the strongest army in the world is after you, you probably don't have time to keep yourself really clean even if there are rooms available. As for the discrepencies with how much Hussein was cooperating, those opinions are both relative interpretations of each person's grasp on the situation. If I say that the text at the top of this website is green, and somebody else says its yellow, does it prove that the text doesn't exist and we are both lying? As for Hussein being disoriented, considering the ventihilation of that hole, I really doubt you would need nerve gas. Besides, that DISPROVES that three months earlier theory, because it would have worn off by now. Congradulations oh enlightened one. You managed to prevent yourself from being brainwashed by the American media. Too bad you have instead been brainwashed by the European media and the conspiracy theorists. Brilliant. Note to Bacchus: These were the idiots I was talking about. As for that statue coming down. The scene was longer than what was aired. It started with a few Iraqis trying to pull down the statue, then the tank coming by. They just cut the first part out. That being said, it was still mostly a propaganda shot. A statue being pulled down isn't in and of itself newsworthy. So what? Its war, a little propaganda is spread. As long as it isn't false information, its perfectly acceptible, just like advertising. In order for the statue to be wrong, you have to prove that the statue itself is still standing. Otherwise, it really means nothing. As for the US training future Al Queda members, that means nothing as well. Alliances are made, alliances are broken. Time changes everything. At the time, it was the best option available. Without a crystal ball, I really don't know how one can tell which group of unstable middle eastern fundamentalist nutcases would turn on you a few decades down the line. We did what was the best decision at the time. Hindsight is 20/20. You people need to realise that the world isn't black and white, but a series of greys. Yes, the war in Iraq wasn't white, but it wasn't black either. It also was a lighter shade of grey than the next available option of containment. If you keep waiting around for a perfectly white option to come around, the world is going to p!@#$%^&* you by.

Also explaining why a 2x2 or greater decoy will easily p!@#$%^&* through a 1 tile wide passageway.

I apologize. I mistakingly grouped you with the "Bush is an idiot/US is greedy/You are all brainwashed by the media/I am the only person on the planet with a brain" crowd. It jis ust after seing so many peeps have that at!@#$%^&*ude, I began !@#$%^&*uming that everybody had that at!@#$%^&*ude. It was wrong for me to make that !@#$%^&*umption just as wrong My sources were pretty much what I remember when I watched the discussions at the UN. The flaws in that are obviously that my memory isn't perfect, and that I am interpreting it instead of quoting it. All I am using however is that France and Germany made more of a "Let's wait until we get more proof approach while Russia had more of a "There isn't any ties between Hussein and terrorists" approach. I also used a website I did on anchient Iraqi history to cite the struggle over Islamic philosophy in AD 1300s. I don't have the url on me, but I think it was on www.saleh.net or something like that. However, all I wanted to do with that was prove that terrorists use a lot of relgious philosophy. I got the information about latin america from the Latin American cultures course I took last year. I can't really give you that citation, so I will use logic instead. If you had two identical resources, one on the other side of the world, the other a little ways south of you, which would you tap first? Logically, the US has to affect the western hemisphere more than the eastern. Also, ask N64. He knows very well how much money Latin American countries owe the US. Just hollar if I missed anything Overall, I think standing by itself, going into Iraq is mostly nuetral. There can be arguements for or against the action, but they will really take us nowhere. However, I think that the real moral action would have been for the whole world to go in in 1992. (yes, he invaded Kuwait in 91, but such a campaign to remove him likely would have taken a little while longer.) That way, we would have prevented all of the pain and suffering since then, would have sent a much clearer message to other dictators, and there would be no doubt about our reactions. You invade another country without trying to justify it, you get attacked - plain and simple. What was wrong is what we did do. We gave Hussein "mercy" and left Iraq with "peace". However, from that point on, Kurdish rebels almost constantly kept revolting, and the US was left to enforce the no-fly zones. We would leave them in this state until we got definitive proof of the status of his WMDs. If he had them, we would finish him off and look like heros. If he didn't, the number of Kurdish rebels would double the next day, because they would no longer have to fear annihilation by chemical gases. And no doubts about it, half of the worlds powers would line up to give them a little traing here and a few weapons there. Overall, this whole "peace" from 91 on was nothing more than a sick and demented game. The goal of it was the eventual destruction of Hussein in a way that would keep the world leader's hands clean. They wanted Hussein down, but they didn't want to play a part in taking him down. However, Husseing obviously played it smart. He did all he could to leave it ambiguous. Thus, the world didn't have the nice clean proof they wanted, but the rebels couldn't risk more open attacks. However, this wasn't complete. In order to contain Hussein and this game of death, we needed to establish a no-fly zone. The enforcement of this zone lied mostly with US and British forces. Why was Bush and Blair not as willing to continue this? Partially because the game failed to keep their hands clean. Think about it, Desert Storm was a UN action. The economic sanctions and the weapons inspections were also UN mandates. Why does Iraq then hate the US? Because in the end, we were the ones who had to drop bombs on their AA equipment. Somebody earlier said that the term "spider hole" was media manipulation. "Spider hole" wasn't media manipulation; the fact that for twelve years, an environment of almost daily bombings as well as revolutionary activity counted as peace is media manipulation. Face it, the rest of the world screwed the Iraqi people as well as the US, all so that they can look like golden boys by not finishing the fight. Bush an idiot? Hardly. The US was getting nothing out of this so-called peace except animosity from the Iraqi people. Clinton was the idiot for accepting these terms in the first place! US is greedy and selfish? Well, if not wanting to be corn-packed counts as selfish, then guilty as charged. At the moment I am not saying that going into Iraq was the absolute right thing to do. All I'm saying that the so called peace between Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom was an abomination.

Me again, as if the length didn't give it away.

Well, bullet-player and bomb player work as such: There is a dot matrix with all objects being counted as one pixel behind the scenes, and a collision is detected when the distance between the ship and the bullet equals the ship radius. Same thing with bombs, except with prox.

The head of the pilot looks kind of strange. You should probably remove it entirely. If you dun wanna, you should tint the color slightly and give him a helmet.

(OOC-If you haven't figured it out by now, I kinda have a lot of hidden gadjets. I have a passive gadget that allows me to walk through shields, and the wires are not usual weapons, so the shields didn't consider them a threat. Okay okay, that's BS, but I really can't say "I didn't notice" now can I? Sorry. I'll make it up to you at the end of this post.) Ail was in luck. The only reason he needed to hire another pilot was because the last Jav he stole had a security transponder on it, and Ithkian forces could track it easily. However, in his new ship, Ail was safely able to make the shipment. Back in the bar, another group of Alliance troops entered the bar. "Who blew up that Jav outside?", said the commander. Since this particular soldier was slightly psychic, he immeadiately turned to Greased_Lightning. "We on behalf of the people of the Alliance, and acting in accord with the Ithkian treaty would like to thank you for killing the dreaded Ailius "the Aileron" Judkovsky. A few weeks ago, he stole a part of some terraforming equipment, and made off in a stolen Javelin. This is just one of many acts against the Ithkians that Aileron has done since the war ended. We in the Alliance are bound by treaty to facilitate in hunting down this bandit. A security tracking device placed inside the vessel enabled us to track it here. We thank you for destroying his ship, and judging by a skeleton found inside the wreckage, we know he was inside that you killed this dangerous criminal. As thanks on behalf of the Alliance and the Ithkians, please accept this reward of $5,000,000,000" With that, the Alliance commander hands Greased_Lighting a briefcase full of money and leaves.

Well, that was my overall point in the long post. The causes of terrorism are very widespread. In order to eliminate it, we have to change their overall beliefs. It is obviously more difficult than just killing Bin Laden or dismantling Al Queda. In order to change their beliefs, we pretty much have to change the whole Middle Eastern culture. That was pretty much the point of the long post, nothing more. (As for Bacchus: Sorry, but I don't have the time to write a political paper for you, and even if I did it wouldn't change your mind anyway.)

(OOC comment - This isn't the Forum Fight club in the Trash Talk forums. You people need to serious up a little. Yeah, this isn't hardcore RPG and thank God it isn't, but please play with SOME seriousness) Aileron, standing cloaked in the shadowy corner of the bar, pulled a mysterious device out of his cloak. With a push of a button, the blown up headless decoy in the far off ocean disentegrated into nothing. Seeing that the bar was filled with idiots, he decided to look for a pilot elseware. He walked out of the bar, and looks at the parking lot. "Hey, who blew up the ship I stole?!?" Ail didn't like Javs anyway, but was a little annoyed that the parking lot wasn't equiped with a safety zone. Ail then walked over to the Crome Jav. A wire from under his right sleeve picked the door lock with ease. Then, Ail saw the Bar. "How annoying" Ail thought to himself. He then stepped out of the Jav. Then raising his sleeve, a very fast wire whipped out from under his sleeve and cuts the whole stick off. He then got into the Jav. He launches a mesch of wires into the ships computer. They hardwired the ships computer and connected it directly to Ail's brain. In seconds, the Jav lifted off and flew so far away that nobody can chase. A few minutes, a squad of fully armed (NPC) Alliance Soldiers walked into the bar. "We are looking for Apple Pie for the rape and murder of Judith Jones." "He is dead" "Fine, we will take the body, resusitate him, try him, and execute him" A short time later, Apple Pie is back to life and in a jail cell.